Advertisement

Cost Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors, Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 (DPP-4) Inhibitors: A Systematic Review

  • Dongzhe Hong
  • Lei Si
  • Minghuan Jiang
  • Hui Shao
  • Wai-kit Ming
  • Yingnan Zhao
  • Yan Li
  • Lizheng ShiEmail author
Systematic Review

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to systematically review cost-effectiveness studies of newer antidiabetic medications.

Methods

The PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Cochrane Library–NHS Economic Evaluation Database (Wiley), Cochrane Library–Health Technology Assessment Database (Wiley), Cochrane Library–Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (Wiley), and the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry databases (from 1 January 2000 to 1 June 2018) were searched. The search strategies included the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) term ‘economics’, and the MeSH entry terms ‘cost’, ‘cost effectiveness’, ‘value’, and ‘cost utility’, as well as all names for GLP-1 receptor agonists, DPP-4 inhibitors, and SGLT2 inhibitors. Inclusion criteria included (1) cost-effectiveness studies of the newer antidiabetic medications, including sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors; and (2) full-text publications in English. Two reviewers independently screened the titles, abstracts, and full-text articles to select studies for data extraction. Discrepancies were resolved by discussion and consensus. The quality of reporting cost-effectiveness analyses was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guideline.

Results

Among 85 studies selected, 82 clearly stated the types of diabetes model used (e.g. CORE model), and 70 studied used validated diabetes models. Seventy-four (87%) studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies, and 72 (85%) studies were conducted from a payer’s perspective. Seventy-six (89%) studies presented were of good quality (20–24 CHEERS items), and nine were of moderate quality (14–19 items). Thirty studies compared newer antidiabetic medications with insulin, 3 studies compared newer antidiabetic medications with thiazolidinediones (TZDs), 15 studies compared newer antidiabetic medications with sulfonylureas, 40 studies compared new antidiabetic medications with alternative newer antidiabetic medication, and 9 studies compared other antidiabetic agents that were not included above. Newer antidiabetic medications were reported to be cost-effective in 26 of 30 (87%) studies compared with insulin, and 13 of 15 (87%) studies compared with sulfonylureas.

Conclusions

Most economic evaluations of antidiabetic medications have good reporting quality and use validated diabetes models. The newer antidiabetic medications in most of the reviewed studies were found to be cost effective, compared with insulin, TZDs, and sulfonylureas.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Lizheng Shi and Dongzhe Hong formulated the study question. Dongzhe Hong also drafted the data abstraction form and the project proposal, and developed the search strategies for study selection; all other authors reviewed and revised the search strategies and the study materials. Dongzhe Hong and Minghuan Jiang screened the titles and abstracts, and extracted articles for full-text review. Hui Shao, Yingnan Zhao, Yan Li, and Lizheng Shi performed the critical appraisal of the studies. Dongzhe Hong, Lei Si, Minghuan Jiang, and Wai-kit Ming abstracted data from the selected articles, and Dongzhe Hong conducted the data synthesis. Dongzhe Hong also drafted the Methods and Introduction sections of the manuscript, and Lei Si drafted the Introduction, Discussion, and Conclusions sections. All authors reviewed and revised the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This research received no specific grants from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Conflicts of Interest

Lei Si is a recipient of the National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship (GNT1139826). Yan Li was partly supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01HL141427. Dongzhe Hong, Minghuan Jiang, Hui Shao, Wai-kit Ming, Yingnan Zhao, and Lizheng Shi have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    DeFronzo RA, Ferrannini E, Groop L, Henry RR, Herman WH, Holst JJ, et al. Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nature Rev Dis Prim. 2015;1:15019.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rowley WR, Bezold C, Arikan Y, Byrne E, Krohe S. Diabetes 2030: insights from yesterday, today, and future trends. Popul Health Manag. 2017;20(1):6–12.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Worldwide trends in diabetes since 1980: a pooled analysis of 751 population-based studies with 4.4 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387(10027):1513–30.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    World Health Organization. Global report on diabetes: World Health Organization; 2016.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Economic Costs of Diabetes in the U.S. in 2017. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(5):917–928.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    GBD 2016 DALYs and HALE Collaborators. Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 333 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE) for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390(10100):1260–344.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tuomilehto J, Schwarz PEH. Preventing Diabetes: Early Versus Late Preventive Interventions. Diabetes Care. 2016;39 Suppl 2):S115.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gourgari E, Wilhelm EE, Hassanzadeh H, Aroda VR, Shoulson I. A comprehensive review of the FDA-approved labels of diabetes drugs: Indications, safety, and emerging cardiovascular safety data. J Diabetes Compl. 2017;31(12):1719–27.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Baar MJB, van Ruiten CC, Muskiet MHA, van Bloemendaal L, Ijzerman RG, van Raalte DH. SGLT2 inhibitors in combination therapy: from mechanisms to clinical considerations in type 2 diabetes management. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(8):1543.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhuo X, Zhang P, Kahn HS, Bardenheier BH, Li R, Gregg EW. Change in medical spending attributable to diabetes: national data from 1987 to 2011. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(4):581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith-Spangler CM, Bhattacharya J, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD. Diabetes, its treatment, and catastrophic medical spending in 35 developing countries. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(2):319–26.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gray AM, Clarke PM, Wolstenholme JL, Wordsworth S. Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in healthcare. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shao H, Fonseca V, Stoecker C, Liu S, Shi L. Novel Risk Engine for Diabetes Progression and Mortality in USA: building, Relating, Assessing, and Validating Outcomes (BRAVO). Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(9):1125–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, et al. The CORE Diabetes Model: projecting long-term clinical outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of interventions in diabetes mellitus (types 1 and 2) to support clinical and reimbursement decision-making. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S5–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Clarke PM, Gray AM, Briggs A, Farmer AJ, Fenn P, Stevens RJ, et al. A model to estimate the lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes: the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Outcomes Model (UKPDS no. 68). Diabetologia. 2004;47(10):1747–59.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geng J, Yu H, Mao Y, Zhang P, Chen Y. Cost effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for type 2 diabetes. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33(6):581–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Permsuwan U, Dilokthornsakul P, Saokaew S, Thavorn K, Chaiyakunapruk N. Cost-effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor monotherapy in elderly type 2 diabetes patients in Thailand. ClinicoEcon Outcomes Res. 2016;8:521–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):1.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) statement. Cost Effect Resour Alloc. 2013;11(1):6.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ray JA, Boye KS, Yurgin N, Valentine WJ, Roze S, McKendrick J, et al. Exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK: a model of long-term clinical and cost outcomes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2007;23(3):609–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shaya FT, Sohn K, Lee S, Bleu-Laine R, Lim J, Casciano M. Clinical and economic evaluation of exenatide for formulary decisions. J Med Econ. 2007;10(4):529–37.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Minshall ME, Oglesby AK, Wintle ME, Valentine WJ, Roze S, Palmer AJ. Estimating the long-term cost-effectiveness of exenatide in the United States: an adjunctive treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Value Health. 2008;11(1):22–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brändle M, Erny-Albrecht KM, Goodall G, Spinas GA, Streit P, Valentine WJ. Exenatide versus insulin glargine: a cost-effectiveness evaluation in patients with Type 2 diabetes in Switzerland. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;47(8):501–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mittendorf T, Smith-Palmer J, Timlin L, Happich M, Goodall G. Evaluation of exenatide vs. insulin glargine in type 2 diabetes: Cost-effectiveness analysis in the German setting. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2009;11(11):1068–79.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sullivan SD, Alfonso-Cristancho R, Conner C, Hammer M, Blonde L. Long-term outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving glimepiride combined with liraglutide or rosiglitazone. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2009;8:12.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lee WC, Conner C, Hammer M. Results of a model analysis of the cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus exenatide added to metformin, glimepiride, or both for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the United States. Clin Ther. 2010;32(10):1756–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Beaudet A, Palmer JL, Timlin L, Wilson B, Bruhn D, Boye KS, et al. Cost-utility of exenatide once weekly compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK. J Med Econ. 2011;14(3):357–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goodall G, Costi M, Timlin L, Reviriego J, Sacristán JA, Smith-Palmer J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of exenatide versus insulin glargine in Spanish patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Endocrinologia y Nutricion. 2011;58(7):331–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lee WC, Conner C, Hammer M. Cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus rosiglitazone, both in combination with glimepiride in treatment of type 2 diabetes in the US. Curr Med Res Opin. 2011;27(5):897–906.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Valentine WJ, Palmer AJ, Lammert M, Langer J, Brändle M. Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus exenatide BID in patients with type 2 diabetes who fail to improve with oral antidiabetic agents. Clin Ther. 2011;33(11):1698–712.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Davies MJ, Chubb BD, Smith IC, Valentine WJ. Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea or sitagliptin, all as add-on to metformin monotherapy in Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2012;29(3):313–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee WC, Samyshkin Y, Langer J, Palmer JL. Long-term clinical and economic outcomes associated with liraglutide versus sitagliptin therapy when added to metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a CORE diabetes model analysis. J Med Econ. 2012;15(Suppl. 2):28–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Samyshkin Y, Guillermin AL, Best JH, Brunell SC, Lloyd A. Long-term cost-utility analysis of exenatide once weekly versus insulin glargine for the treatment of type 2 diabetes patients in the US. J Med Econ. 2012;15(Suppl. 2):6–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fonseca T, Clegg J, Caputo G, Norrbacka K, Dilla T, Alvarez M. The cost-effectiveness of exenatide once weekly compared with exenatide twice daily and insulin glargine for the treatment of patients with type two diabetes and body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2 in Spain. J Med Econ. 2013;16(7):926–38.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Raya PM, Pérez A, De Arellano AR, Briones T, Hunt B, Valentine WJ. Incretin therapy for type 2 diabetes in Spain: a cost-effectiveness analysis of liraglutide versus sitagliptin. Diabetes Ther. 2013;4(2):417–30.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Brown ST, Grima DG, Sauriol L. Cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus sitagliptin in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clin Ther. 2014;36(11):1576–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Huetson P, Palmer JL, Levorsen A, Fournier M, Germe M, McLeod E. Cost-effectiveness of once daily GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide compared to bolus insulin both in combination with basal insulin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes in Norway. J Med Econ. 2015;18(8):573–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pérez A, Mezquita Raya P, Ramírez de Arellano A, Briones T, Hunt B, Valentine WJ. Cost-effectiveness analysis of incretin therapy for type 2 diabetes in spain: 1.8 mg liraglutide versus sitagliptin. Diabetes Ther. 2015;6(1):61–74.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Dilla T, Alexiou D, Chatzitheofilou I, Ayyub R, Lowin J, Norrbacka K. The cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide versus liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Spain in patients with BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2. J Med Econ. 2017;20(5):443–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Gordon J, McEwan P, Hurst M, Puelles J. The cost-effectiveness of alogliptin versus sulfonylurea as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Ther. 2016;7(4):825–45.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Roussel R, Martinez L, Vandebrouck T, Douik H, Emiel P, Guery M, et al. Evaluation of the long-Term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes in France. J Med Econ. 2016;19(2):121–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hunt B, Glah D, van der Vliet M. Modeling the long-term cost-effectiveness of ideglira in patients with type 2 diabetes who are failing to meet glycemic targets on basal insulin alone in the Netherlands. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(4):753–65.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hunt B, Kragh N, McConnachie CC, Valentine WJ, Rossi MC, Montagnoli R. Long-term cost-effectiveness of two GLP-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the italian setting: liraglutide versus lixisenatide. Clin Ther. 2017;39(7):1347–59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hunt B, Mocarski M, Valentine WJ, Langer J. Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus liraglutide added to basal insulin for patients with type 2 diabetes failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the USA. J Med Econ. 2017;20(7):663–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hunt B, Mocarski M, Valentine WJ, Langer J. IDegLira versus insulin glargine U100: a long-term cost-effectiveness analysis in the US setting. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(3):531–44.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hunt B, Vega-Hernandez G, Valentine WJ, Kragh N. Evaluation of the long-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide vs lixisenatide for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the UK setting. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(6):842–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hunt B, Ye Q, Valentine WJ, Ashley D. Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of daily administered GLP-1 receptor agonists for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the united kingdom. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(1):129–47.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kvapil M, Prázný M, Holik P, Rychna K, Hunt B. Cost-Effectiveness of IDegLira Versus Insulin Intensification Regimens for the Treatment of Adults with Type 2 Diabetes in the Czech Republic. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(6):1331–47.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Mezquita-Raya P, Ramírez de Arellano A, Kragh N, Vega-Hernandez G, Pöhlmann J, Valentine WJ, et al. Liraglutide versus lixisenatide: long-term cost-effectiveness of GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in Spain. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(2):401–15.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Psota M, Psenkova MB, Racekova N, De Arellano AR, Vandebrouck T, Hunt B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of IDegLira versus basal-bolus insulin for patients with type 2 diabetes in the Slovak health system. ClinicoEcon Outcomes Res. 2017;9:749–62.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Vega-Hernandez G, Wojcik R, Schlueter M. Cost-Effectiveness of Liraglutide Versus Dapagliflozin for the Treatment of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in the UK. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(3):513–30.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Basson M, Ntais D, Ayyub R, Wright D, Lowin J, Chartier F, et al. The cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus exenatide QW for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in France. Diabetes Ther. 2018;9(1):13–25.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ishii H, Madin-Warburton M, Strizek A, Thornton-Jones L, Suzuki S. The cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide versus insulin glargine for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan. J Med Econ. 2018;21(5):488–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Bruhn D, Martin AA, Tavares R, Hunt B, Pollock RF. Cost-utility of albiglutide versus insulin lispro, insulin glargine, and sitagliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the US. J Med Econ. 2016;19(7):672–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Davies MJ, Glah D, Chubb B, Konidaris G, McEwan P. Cost Effectiveness of IDegLira vs. Alternative basal insulin intensification therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus uncontrolled on basal insulin in a UK setting. PharmacoEconomics. 2016;34(9):953–66.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bergenheim K, Williams SA, Bergeson JG, Stern L, Sriprasert M. US cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Pharm Benef. 2012;4(1):20–8.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Erhardt W, Bergenheim K, Duprat-Lomon I, McEwan P. Cost effectiveness of saxagliptin and metformin versus sulfonylurea and metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Germany: a cardiff diabetes model analysis. Clin Drug Investig. 2012;32(3):189–202.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Granström O, Bergenheim K, McEwan P, Sennfält K, Henriksson M. Cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin (Onglyza®) in type 2 diabetes in Sweden. Prim Care Diabetes. 2012;6(2):127–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Grzeszczak W, Czupryniak L, Kolasa K, Sciborski C, Lomon ID, McEwan P. The cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin versus NPH insulin when used in combination with other oral antidiabetes agents in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Poland. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14(1):65–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Elgart JF, Caporale JE, Gonzalez L, Aiello E, Waschbusch M, Gagliardino JJ. Treatment of type 2 diabetes with saxagliptin: a pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Argentina. Health Econ Rev. 2013;3(1):1–9.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Van Haalen HGM, Pompen M, Bergenheim K, McEwan P, Townsend R, Roudaut M. Cost effectiveness of adding dapagliflozin to insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the Netherlands. Clin Drug Investig. 2014;34(2):135–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Charokopou M, McEwan P, Lister S, Callan L, Bergenheim K, Tolley K, et al. Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors as an add-on to metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus from a UK healthcare system perspective. BMC Health Serv Res. 2015;15:496.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Charokopou M, McEwan P, Lister S, Callan L, Bergenheim K, Tolley K, et al. The cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin versus sulfonylurea as an add-on to metformin in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2015;32(7):890–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Deng J, Gu S, Shao H, Dong H, Zou D, Shi L. Cost-effectiveness analysis of exenatide twice daily (BID) vs insulin glargine once daily (QD) as add-on therapy in Chinese patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by oral therapies. J Med Econ. 2015;18(11):974–89.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Gu S, Deng J, Shi L, Mu Y, Dong H. Cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin vs glimepiride as a second-line therapy added to metformin in Type 2 diabetes in China. J Med Econ. 2015;18(10):808–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Chuang LH, Verheggen BG, Charokopou M, Gibson D, Grandy S, Kartman B. Cost-effectiveness analysis of exenatide once-weekly versus dulaglutide, liraglutide, and lixisenatide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: an analysis from the UK NHS perspective. J Med Econ. 2016;19(12):1127–34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Gordon J, McEwan P, Sabale U, Kartman B, Wolffenbuttel BHR. The cost-effectiveness of exenatide twice daily (BID) vs insulin lispro three times daily (TID) as add-on therapy to titrated insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Med Econ. 2016;19(12):1167–74.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Gu S, Mu Y, Zhai S, Zeng Y, Zhen X, Dong H. Cost-Effectiveness of dapagliflozin versus acarbose as a monotherapy in type 2 diabetes in China. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0165629.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Gu S, Zeng Y, Yu D, Hu X, Dong H. Cost-Effectiveness of saxagliptin versus acarbose as second-Line therapy in type 2 diabetes in China. PLoS One. 2016;11(11):e0167190.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Tzanetakos C, Tentolouris N, Kourlaba G, Maniadakis N. Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin as add-on to metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Greece. Clin Drug Investig. 2016;36(8):649–59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Zhang X, Liu S, Li Y, Wang Y, Tian M, Liu G. Long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of metformin combined with liraglutide or exenatide for type 2 diabetes mellitus based on the CORE diabetes model study. PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0156393.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Gu S, Wang X, Qiao Q, Gao W, Wang J, Dong H. Cost-effectiveness of exenatide twice daily vs insulin glargine as add-on therapy to oral antidiabetic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes in China. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017;19(12):1688–97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Shao H, Zhai S, Zou D, Mir MU, Zawadzki NK, Shi Q, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of dapagliflozin versus glimepiride as monotherapy in a Chinese population with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Curr Med Res Opin. 2017;33(2):359–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tzanetakos C, Bargiota A, Kourlaba G, Gourzoulidis G, Maniadakis N. Cost effectiveness of exenatide once weekly versus insulin glargine and liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Greece. Clin Drug Investig. 2018;38(1):67–77.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Woehl A, Evans M, Tetlow AP, McEwan P. Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with sub-optimally controlled Type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2008;7:24.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Klarenbach S, Cameron C, Singh S, Ur E. Cost-effectiveness of second-line antihyperglycemic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin. CMAJ. 2011;183(16):E1213–20.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Gao L, Zhao FL, Li SC. Cost-utility analysis of liraglutide versus glimepiride as add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes patients in China. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(4):436–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Viriato D, Calado F, Gruenberger JB, Ong SH, Carvalho D, Silva-Nunes J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of metformin plus vildagliptin compared with metformin plus sulphonylurea for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a Portuguese healthcare system perspective. J Med Econ. 2014;17(7):499–507.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Kousoulakou H, Hatzikou M, Baroutsou V, Yfantopoulos J. Cost effectiveness of vildagliptin versus glimepiride as add-on treatment to metformin for the treatment of diabetes mellitus type 2 patients in Greece. Cost Effect Resour Alloc. 2017;15(1):19.Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Kiadaliri AA, Gerdtham UG, Eliasson B, Carlsson KS. Cost-utility analysis of glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors or neutral protamine hagedorn basal insulin as add-on to metformin in type 2 diabetes in Sweden. Diabetes Ther. 2014;5(2):591–607.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Steen Carlsson K, Persson U. Cost-effectiveness of add-on treatments to metformin in a Swedish setting: liraglutide vs sulphonylurea or sitagplitin. J Med Econ. 2014;17(9):658–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ericsson Å, Lundqvist A. Cost effectiveness of insulin degludec plus liraglutide (IDegLira) in a fixed combination for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus in Sweden. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2017;15(2):237–48.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Ericsson Å, Glah D, Lorenzi M, Jansen JP, Fridhammar A. Cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus lixisenatide as add-on therapies to basal insulin in type 2 diabetes. PLoS One. 2018;13(2):e0191953.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Neslusan C, Teschemaker A, Johansen P, Willis M, Valencia-Mendoza A, Puig A. Cost-effectiveness of canagliflozin versus sitagliptin as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Mexico. Value Health Reg Issues. 2015;8:8–19.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Sabapathy S, Neslusan C, Yoong K, Teschemaker A, Johansen P, Willis M. Cost-effectiveness of canagliflozin versus sitagliptin when added to metformin and sulfonylurea in type 2 diabetes in Canada. J Popul Ther Clin Pharmacol. 2016;23(2):e151–68.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Neslusan C, Teschemaker A, Willis M, Johansen P, Vo L. Cost-effectiveness analysis of canagliflozin 300 mg versus dapagliflozin 10 mg added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States. Diabetes Ther. 2018;9(2):565–81.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Gaebler JA, Soto-Campos G, Alperin P, Cohen M, Blickensderfer A, Wintle M, et al. Health and economic outcomes for exenatide once weekly, insulin, and pioglitazone therapies in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a simulation analysis. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2012;8(1):255–64.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Schwarz B, Gouveia M, Chen J, Nocea G, Jameson K, Cook J, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sitagliptin-based treatment regimens in European patients with type 2 diabetes and haemoglobin A1c above target on metformin monotherapy. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2008;10(Suppl 1):43–55.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Sinha A, Rajan M, Hoerger T, Pogach L. Costs and consequences associated with newer medications for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(4):695–700.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Wang B, Roth JA, Nguyen H, Felber E, Furnback W, Garrison LP. The short-term cost-effectiveness of once-daily liraglutide versus once-weekly exenatide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States. PLoS One. 2015;10(4):e0121915.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Cazarim MDS, da Cruz-Cazarim ELC, Baldoni ADO, dos Santos TBE, de Souza PG, Silva IDA, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of different dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitor drugs for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Syndrome Clin Res Rev. 2017;11:S859–65.Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Drummond R, Malkin S, Du Preez M, Lee XY, Hunt B. The management of type 2 diabetes with fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus basal-bolus therapy (insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart): a short-term cost-effectiveness analysis in the UK setting. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2018;20(10):2371–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Langer J, Hunt B, Valentine WJ. Evaluating the short-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes failing metformin monotherapy in the United States. J Manag Care Pharm. 2013;19(3):237–46.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Ektare VU, Lopez JM, Martin SC, Patel DA, Rupnow MF, Botteman MF. Cost efficiency of canagliflozin versus sitagliptin for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Manag Care. 2014;20(10):S204–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Hunt B, McConnachie CC, Gamble C, Dang-Tan T. Evaluating the short-term cost-effectiveness of liraglutide versus lixisenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States. J Med Econ. 2017;20(11):1117–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Hunt B, Mocarski M, Valentine WJ, Langer J. Evaluation of the short-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus continued up-titration of insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes in the USA. Adv Ther. 2017;34(4):954–65.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Lasalvia P, Baquero L, Otálora-Esteban M, Castañeda-Cardona C, Rosselli D. Cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide compared with liraglutide and glargine in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Colombia. Value Health Reg Issues. 2017;14:35–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Chakravarty A, Rastogi M, Dhankhar P, Bell K, Bell KF. Comparison of costs and outcomes of dapagliflozin with other glucose-lowering therapy classes added to metformin using a short-term cost-effectiveness model in the US setting. J Med Econ. 2018;21(5):497–509.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Gourzoulidis G, Tzanetakos C, Ioannidis I, Tsapas A, Kourlaba G, Papageorgiou G, et al. Cost-effectiveness of empagliflozin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus at increased cardiovascular risk in Greece. Clin Drug Investig. 2018;38(5):417–26.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Nguyen E, Coleman CI, Nair S, Weeda ER. Cost-utility of empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk. J Diabetes Compl. 2018;32(2):210–5.Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    Sabale U, Ekman M, Granström O, Bergenheim K, McEwan P. Cost-effectiveness of dapagliflozin (Forxiga®) added to metformin compared with sulfonylurea added to metformin in type 2 diabetes in the Nordic countries. Prim Care Diabetes. 2015;9(1):39–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Teramachi H, Ohta H, Tachi T, Toyoshima M, Mizui T, Goto C, et al. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of DPP-4 inhibitors. Pharmazie. 2013;68(11):909–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    DeKoven M, Lee WC, Bouchard J, Massoudi M, Langer J. Real-world cost-effectiveness: lower cost of treating patients to glycemic goal with liraglutide versus exenatide. Adv Ther. 2014;31(2):202–16.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Thornberry NA, Gallwitz B. Mechanism of action of inhibitors of dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4). Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;23(4):479–86.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Kalra S, Baruah MP, Sahay RK, Unnikrishnan AG, Uppal S, Adetunji O. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: past, present, and future. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2016;20(2):254.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Kalra S. Sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors: a review of their basic and clinical pharmacology. Diabetes Ther. 2014;5(2):355–66.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2015.Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Eddy DM, Hollingworth W, Caro JJ, Tsevat J, McDonald KM, Wong JB. Model transparency and validation: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-7. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(5):733–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Palmer AJ, Roze S, Valentine WJ, Minshall ME, Foos V, Lurati FM, et al. Validation of the CORE Diabetes Model against epidemiological and clinical studies. Curr Med Res Opin. 2004;20(Suppl 1):S27–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Hayes AJ, Leal J, Gray AM, Holman RR, Clarke PM. UKPDS Outcomes Model 2: a new version of a model to simulate lifetime health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using data from the 30 year United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study: UKPDS 82. Diabetologia. 2013;56(9):1925–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Zhao Y, Campbell CR, Fonseca V, Shi L. Impact of hypoglycemia associated with antihyperglycemic medications on vascular risks in veterans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(5):1126–32.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Shi L, Shao H, Zhao Y, Thomas NA. Is hypoglycemia fear independently associated with health-related quality of life? Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:167.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Heine RJ, Van Gaal LF, Johns D, Mihm MJ, Widel MH, Brodows RG. Exenatide versus insulin glargine in patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(8):559–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Palmer AJ, Si L, Tew M, Hua X, Willis MS, Asseburg C, et al. Computer modeling of diabetes and its transparency: a report on the eighth mount hood challenge. Value Health. 2018;21(6):724–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, Briggs A, Akehurst R, Buxton M, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Econ. 2005;14(4):339–47.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dongzhe Hong
    • 1
  • Lei Si
    • 2
  • Minghuan Jiang
    • 3
    • 4
  • Hui Shao
    • 1
  • Wai-kit Ming
    • 5
    • 6
  • Yingnan Zhao
    • 7
  • Yan Li
    • 8
    • 9
  • Lizheng Shi
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health and Tropical MedicineTulane UniversityNew OrleansUSA
  2. 2.The George Institute for Global HealthUniversity of New South WalesKensingtonAustralia
  3. 3.The Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of PharmacyXi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anChina
  4. 4.The Center for Drug Safety and Policy ResearchXi’an Jiaotong UniversityXi’anChina
  5. 5.The First Affiliated HospitalSun Yat-sen UniversityGuangzhouChina
  6. 6.Harvard Medical SchoolBostonUnited States
  7. 7.College of PharmacyXavier University of LouisianaNew OrleansUSA
  8. 8.The New York Academy of MedicineNew YorkUSA
  9. 9.Department of Population Health Science and PolicyIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations